The majority of the Board found that Respondent ignored numerous communications from representatives of the insurance company as well as inquiries of his own clients. Additionally, the Board found that Respondent advised the claims representative for the insurance company that his clients had agreed to settle the claims when in fact no such authority had been given to him by his clients. The Board also found that "Respondent's worst offense in this matter was his continued dishonesty” by making misrepresentations to his clients, to their new attorney and to representatives of the insurance company. Moreover, the Board found that even though Respondent denied that he was aware that he had been terminated by his clients and he denied that he had lied to anyone, "the evidence of record shows otherwise." The majority recommended that he be suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months.
The dissenting members of the Disciplinary Board stated that although the majority describes the Hearing Committee's evaluation of Respondent's testimony as being "not credible" they stated that "a more accurate characterization and one amply supported by the record is that Respondent committed perjury before the panel by lying under oath." The dissenters recommended that Respondent be suspended for a period of one year and one day.
Respondent had received an informal admonition in 2006.
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania suspended Respondent from the bar of the Commonwealth for a period of one year and one day.